Latest news with #ArmyAirForce
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - This Memorial Day, love America enough to fight for it
Memorial Day is the first of the summer's patriotic holidays. That makes it a good time to think about patriotism and what love of country requires of us today. As we honor the people who have died while serving in the U.S. military, let's also consider how we can honor the American promise for which they sacrificed. This year, I've been thinking about two people who taught me different ways of looking at and loving our country. One is Norman Lear, the legendary television producer, energetic activist and founder of my organization, People For the American Way. Lear dropped out of college after the attack on Pearl Harbor to join the Army Air Force, and flew more than 50 missions on a bomber crew to liberate Europe from fascism. He was a lifelong patriot and a lover of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Lear was, up to his final breath, a dogged optimist that people working together could move us closer to the ideals in those documents, even if he was, like many of us, discouraged at times when our progress was threatened. On his 100th birthday, he wrote, 'I am a flag-waving believer in truth, justice and the American way, and I don't understand how so many people who call themselves patriots can support efforts to undermine our democracy and our Constitution.' I second that emotion. The second person I'm thinking about is James Baldwin, the brilliant social critic and one of my favorite authors. My mother introduced me to Baldwin's writings when I was young as a way of helping me understand what it meant to be a Black man in America. Baldwin also helped me understand what it means to be American. 'I love America more than any other country in the world,' Baldwin wrote in 1955, 'and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.' Baldwin and Lear are no longer with us, but there are many brilliant and loving critics who are raising their voices today to defend the Constitution and American ideals. I am proud to align myself with them. Of the many lies perpetuated by President Trump and his allies, one of the most untrue and malicious is that liberals, Democrats, or whoever is their target of the moment, 'hate America.' You can see and hear that false charge everywhere — on social media, from MAGA commentators and publications, right-wing pollsters and even Elon Musk and members of Congress. Even members of the military aren't safe from being smeared. The patriotism of high-ranking officers is denigrated. The libraries at our esteemed military academies are subject to an ideological purge. Meanwhile, Trump's recent speech to troops stationed in Qatar was wildly self-aggrandizing and inappropriately partisan. One of the most ridiculous examples I've seen was Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) charging that Democrats hate America because they weren't enthusiastic about her effort to enshrine in legislation the president's executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico. On what grounds do they make the claim that people who have devoted their lives to service as elected officials, teachers and community activists supposedly hate this country? It's pure propaganda. It's offensive. And it's damaging to our political culture. In fact, all it takes to get smeared by MAGA is criticizing Trump or part of his political agenda. Defending the rights of immigrants to due process. Opposing the reckless destruction of the Department of Government Efficiency's mindless mass firings of scientists, park rangers and other public servants. Supporting the separation of church and state to protect all Americans' religious freedom. To my mind, people taking time to do any of those things is a sign that they love our country enough to fight for what is best about it. Insisting that Trump is required to follow the law and abide by the Constitution is patriotic. As the president prepares to make himself the centerpiece of this year's military parade and next year's celebration of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, remember this: America was founded in resistance to the tyranny of a king. Resisting Trump's efforts to act like a mad and unaccountable king is a profoundly patriotic act. Svante Myrick is president of People For the American Way. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
26-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
This Memorial Day, love America enough to fight for it
Memorial Day is the first of the summer's patriotic holidays. That makes it a good time to think about patriotism and what love of country requires of us today. As we honor the people who have died while serving in the U.S. military, let's also consider how we can honor the American promise for which they sacrificed. This year, I've been thinking about two people who taught me different ways of looking at and loving our country. One is Norman Lear, the legendary television producer, energetic activist and founder of my organization, People For the American Way. Lear dropped out of college after the attack on Pearl Harbor to join the Army Air Force, and flew more than 50 missions on a bomber crew to liberate Europe from fascism. He was a lifelong patriot and a lover of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Lear was, up to his final breath, a dogged optimist that people working together could move us closer to the ideals in those documents, even if he was, like many of us, discouraged at times when our progress was threatened. On his 100th birthday, he wrote, 'I am a flag-waving believer in truth, justice and the American way, and I don't understand how so many people who call themselves patriots can support efforts to undermine our democracy and our Constitution.' I second that emotion. The second person I'm thinking about is James Baldwin, the brilliant social critic and one of my favorite authors. My mother introduced me to Baldwin's writings when I was young as a way of helping me understand what it meant to be a Black man in America. Baldwin also helped me understand what it means to be American. 'I love America more than any other country in the world,' Baldwin wrote in 1955, 'and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.' Baldwin and Lear are no longer with us, but there are many brilliant and loving critics who are raising their voices today to defend the Constitution and American ideals. I am proud to align myself with them. Of the many lies perpetuated by President Trump and his allies, one of the most untrue and malicious is that liberals, Democrats, or whoever is their target of the moment, 'hate America.' You can see and hear that false charge everywhere — on social media, from MAGA commentators and publications, right-wing pollsters and even Elon Musk and members of Congress. Even members of the military aren't safe from being smeared. The patriotism of high-ranking officers is denigrated. The libraries at our esteemed military academies are subject to an ideological purge. Meanwhile, Trump's recent speech to troops stationed in Qatar was wildly self-aggrandizing and inappropriately partisan. One of the most ridiculous examples I've seen was Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) charging that Democrats hate America because they weren't enthusiastic about her effort to enshrine in legislation the president's executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico. On what grounds do they make the claim that people who have devoted their lives to service as elected officials, teachers and community activists supposedly hate this country? It's pure propaganda. It's offensive. And it's damaging to our political culture. In fact, all it takes to get smeared by MAGA is criticizing Trump or part of his political agenda. Defending the rights of immigrants to due process. Opposing the reckless destruction of the Department of Government Efficiency's mindless mass firings of scientists, park rangers and other public servants. Supporting the separation of church and state to protect all Americans' religious freedom. To my mind, people taking time to do any of those things is a sign that they love our country enough to fight for what is best about it. Insisting that Trump is required to follow the law and abide by the Constitution is patriotic. As the president prepares to make himself the centerpiece of this year's military parade and next year's celebration of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, remember this: America was founded in resistance to the tyranny of a king. Resisting Trump's efforts to act like a mad and unaccountable king is a profoundly patriotic act. Svante Myrick is president of People For the American Way.
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
We are called the greatest generation for good reason. Here's why.
Editor's Note: This is the text of a Memorial Day address delivered in 2016. I want to thank Linda Dixon and the (Lexington, Massachusetts) Celebrations Committee for inviting me to speak today. I have declined to speak at such events in the past. I decided to accept the invitation today because so many of those with whom I served in WWII are no longer with us and I want to share with you what we learned in the war and its aftermath. Today we assemble to remember the men and women who sacrificed their lives for our country. It is right and important that we remember and grieve with the families, the mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters, husbands and wives, who lost loved ones in America's wars. Today, we honor the warriors, but never war itself. I fought in World War II in the Army Air Force. Some of my brother soldiers were lost in that war. It was a just war, a war that had to be waged to defeat fascism in Europe that would have enslaved peoples throughout the world. I flew 70 combat missions in that war. On a flight over Ostiglia, Italy in November, 1944 our plane was hit. The pilot and co-pilot were stunned by flak from the enemies' anti- aircraft guns that hit the windshield. The badly damaged plane was diving toward the ground. Unaware that the pilots were incapacitated, I was about to parachute from the plane. But at the last minute I realized no one else was bailing out so I checked the pilots. I found them plumped in the cockpit, stunned. I worked to revive them and was successful. They regained control of the plane. So, I was one of the lucky ones who survived that war without any serious mishaps. We lost more than 400,000 Americans in that war and the worldwide losses exceeded 80 million people. My younger brother, Arnold, was wounded in the assault on Okinawa. We mourn for the Americans who died in that war and for all those who died in wars before and since. My generation has been referred to as the greatest generation. I think this appellation is appropriate for three reasons. First unlike the divisiveness and sectarianism of today, Americans were united in a single purpose that involved everyone in one way or another. Whether you were on the front lines or on the home front, whether you were rich or poor, everyone was asked to sacrifice for the good of the country and mankind. Second, during the war, President Franklin Roosevelt issued an executive order that forced US military contractors to end racial discrimination in employment and (later President) Truman began integrating the armed forces. Third, returning soldiers were offered an opportunity to pursue a college education through the GI Bill, an education many could not have afforded otherwise. America invested in its people creating the most educated and productive generation the world had ever seen. That generation went on to build an American that ended legal segregation and created an economy of shared prosperity. Today education is becoming prohibitively expensive. Student debt has soared. We are losing our place in the world's intellectual growth. Inequality has returned to levels not seen since the Gilded Age. Wars have caused enormous losses of life and property in the past. But with the weapons available in the world today those losses are nothing compared to what could happen in an all-out war today. Entire cities and their populations could be lost with one bomb detonating. Add to that the threat of climate change and it is clear that our survival and the future of our kids, grandkids and great grandkids requires cooperation among nations rather than blustering, sword rattling and conflict. Why do we fight wars? Since World War II we have been involved in too many wars for the wrong reasons. Our friends one day become our enemies the next. Our leaders rally us to war by claiming that freedom or democracy is endangered and, in the end, we make enemies of those we are told we are freeing. War is an ultimate political solution and must never be entered into lightly. It is a double tragedy to lose Americans in wars that should never have been fought. And it is for that reason that I think Memorial Day should be a day to honor peace and those who campaign for peaceful solutions as well as the men and women who have given their lives for our country in war. We mourn for the Americans and all those who died in World War II and all wars before and since. Over 100,000 Americans have died in wars since WWII. I question how many of those losses might have been avoided had we sought solutions other than resorting to war. Opinion: My aunts survived the Holocaust. Now, we must do more than say 'never again.' The men and women who serve in our armed forces do not choose the wars our country fights. Politicians, businessmen and generals make that deadly choice. But it is the soldiers who make the ultimate sacrifice, often without questioning the motives of those who send them into battle. On this Memorial Day, I ask all of you to remember the men and women who died too young and those living who have served or are serving our country and to all veterans living and dead. Milwaukee resident Michael Rosen contributed this speech from his uncle Sam Berman, who spoke at a Massachusetts Memorial Day event in 2016. Berman, who attended the University of Wisconsin, won the Distinguished Flying Cross during World War II. He died on May 3, 2021 at 98. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: WWII veteran says Memorial Day should also honor peace | Opinion
Yomiuri Shimbun
21-05-2025
- General
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Former Army Pilot Hopes for World Without War; ‘War Produces Nothing But Victims'
The Yomiuri Shimbun Reiji Kitajima talks about his wartime experiences while showing pictures from his days at the Mito army aviation school, on April 18 in Fujisawa. During the Pacific War, Reiji Kitajima was sent to Manila and other battlefronts in the south as an army fighter plane pilot. At 102 years old, Kitajima, who lives in Fujisawa, Kanagawa Prefecture, recalls why he became a pilot: to fulfill his childhood dream of flying. He also remembers how he gradually came to see shooting down enemy fighter plane as a matter of course. With almost 80 years having passed since the end of the war, there are fewer and fewer people who can share their wartime experiences. 'War produces nothing but victims,' he said. 'We must continue to think about what we can do to stop war.' Kitajima was born in Shizuoka Prefecture in 1923, the sixth of nine children to parents who were green tea farmers. After graduating from a higher elementary school, he left his parents' house in search of a stable life and began working at a post office in present-day Fujisawa. Although the Sino-Japanese War had begun in 1937, he believed wars had nothing to do with him. However, his life totally changed when he was 18 years old. He saw a call for volunteer soldiers in a newspaper and was inspired to become a pilot so he could fly out of the small world he had lived in so far. He volunteered for the military without a sense of the realness of war. He passed a test and was admitted to a pilot training school. After studying at the school, he went on to the Mito army aviation school, where in addition to receiving flight training and classroom lectures on meteorology and other subjects, he listened to sermons by a Buddhist monk. The monk lived in the neighborhood and visited the school every day to preach the teachings of militarism. 'Your honorable death in battle will help protect your family and Japan,' the monk said. Kitajima started to become more aware of the war, and his fear of death diminished. Courtesy of Reiji Kitajima A group photo taken when Kitajima was in the Mito army aviation school In March 1943, he graduated from the aviation school and was assigned to an Army Air Force unit in the south. While in the unit, he mainly flew a Hayabusa Type 1 Fighter and a Shoki Type 2 Single-Seat Fighter and experienced aerial dogfights in Manila, Java, New Guinea and other places. He always displayed a photograph of his father and mother in the cockpit. During combat in the air between Manila and Borneo, his plane experienced engine trouble and made an emergency landing on sea. He thought no one would come to save him, but he was eventually rescued by a ship and narrowly avoided death. Whenever news of a comrade's death reached his base, he always thought, 'That will be me someday.' For respite, he enjoyed Java chocolates, which he had never tasted in Japan, the sweet flavor distracting him from the war. Around the beginning of 1945, fewer than 20 Japanese fighter planes had to intercept twice as many enemy fighter planes at a higher frequency than ever before. Kitajima felt strongly that the war was deteriorating for Japan. Many of his fellow pilots who had headed back to Japan on resupply missions did not return, sparking concerns over a shortage of war supplies. Every time this happened, he would come close to losing all hope. However, he encouraged himself by thinking, 'We have to win.' End of war Courtesy of Reiji Kitajima Reiji Kitajima when he was in the army Kitajima learned that the war had ended when he was in Java. Tears fell from his eyes as he thought, 'I can return to Japan alive.' He spent six months as a captive in Singapore before returning home to his parents in Shizuoka Prefecture. His mother welcomed him with a hug. After the war, he worked at a machinery component manufacturer in Fujisawa until he reached the age of retirement. In addition to being involved in activities that contributed to the community, he helped to establish the Chiran Peace Museum in Kagoshima Prefecture since he had experiences in escorting fighter planes on the kamikaze special attack mission during the war. Kitajima now lives in a nursing home in Fujisawa. Even after 80 years, he still recalls being in the cockpit, pushing a button with his left hand to shoot and seeing an enemy fighter plane hit by the bullets falling slowly. During the war, he thought he did what he had to do. Now, however, he feels that killing is absolutely something that must not be done. 'I only survived the war by chance,' he said. 'I want our society based on the fundamental principle of not waging war.'
Budapest Times
05-04-2025
- Politics
- Budapest Times
Other factors at play besides atomic bombs
History's simple telling is that the United States unleashed the two most lethal weapons of World War Two or any other war against the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to quickly force a surrender by a stubborn enemy and save thousands of American lives. Historian Richard Overy takes a wider view that questions this mostly accepted narrative. Under his scrutiny, the easy equation that 'bombing equals surrender' is no longer viable. The author rethinks the way this final stage of the war and the role of the bombs should be regarded. This standard conclusion about the bombing must be set in the broader context of what was happening in Japan in the months before surrender. Overy's case is that there was already a long struggle within the country during 1945 to find a way to end the war, and this suggests an alternative account beyond the impact of America's 'rain of ruin'. B-29 aircraft had firebombed Tokyo and other cities considerably before the atomic attacks against Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 then Nagasaki three days later. For the leadership of Japan the idea of unconditional surrender was a cultural leap too difficult to make, and Overy cites persistent divisions among the decision makers whether to terminate the war or fight to an annihilating finish. These were disagreements exceedingly difficult to reconcile even when faced with the reality of aerial destruction. Japan had made a surprise attack on the United States naval base Pearl Harbor on Oahu, Hawaii, on December 7, 1941, bringing the neutral US into the Second World War. At that time the US had no air bases near enough to Japan or an aircraft with sufficient range to target the country. When a handful of bombers launched from an aircraft carrier against Tokyo on April 18, 1942, it was a token gesture. By May 1943 the US began to work on a conventional bombing campaign from bases in China, with the hope that this would switch to attacks from island bases captured in the Pacific. The targets included 'industrial and urban areas', with war production craft shops in and among private homes, and this opened the way to the huge urban destruction of 1945. The large-scale damage to civilian areas through conventional incendiary bombing was contrary to previous US air force doctrine, and a prevailing view among crews was that it was neither morallíy nor strategically sensible. The M-69 incendiary had a napalm filling. But the strategy made it easier to cross the threshold of atomic bombing later on. The Army Air Force, as it was then, made a decisive contribution to victory over Japan, and post-war the role of this air offensive would be debated. One supposition was, that the bombing by the Army Air Force would help it claim independence by matching the efforts made by the US Army in South-East Asia and the US Navy across the Pacific. Meanwhile, in December 1941 President Roosevelt agreed to an American research project into the possibility of an atomic bomb, then in June 1942 approved its creation. The Potsdam Declaration was an ultimatum by the US, Great Britain and China on July 26, 1945 calling for the unconditional surrender of Japan, but capitulation had no precedent in the country. For thousands of years Japan had not been invaded: in the wars against China in the 1890s, with Tsarist Russia in 1904-05, and against Germany in the Great War of 1914-1918, Japan had been victorious. The country's expectation with the long war against China that began in 1937, then against the British Empire, the US and the Netherlands from 1941, was 'certain victory' ( hissö ). Thus surrender in this culture was a foreign concept and talk of it was forbidden. Capitulation had no precedent and to achieve it required a political process centred on Emperor Hirohito, who was considered a divinity, and his willingness to give his 'sacred decision' ( seidan ), with all its constitutional complexities. The firebombing continued unabated until August 14-15 and had been a central reference point from the early summer for those who sought peace, including the Emperor, 'precisely because it intensified the looming social crisis through evacuation, dispersal, and physical destruction and exposed the feebleness of the Japanese armed forces in response', Overy writes. The author is Honorary Research Professor at the University of Exeter in England. He says the impact on the Japanese leadership of the two atomic attacks was less direct and less significant than US President Harry Truman (and most later historians) assumed. The bombs together destroyed only 5 per cent of the urban area, and conventional bombing the remaining 95 per cent. Eight of 25 raids caused more destruction than Hiroshima. Bombing raids still hit Toyama, Fukuyama and Yawara with devastating effect and degrees of urban decimation outweighing Hiroshima. At first, then, the bomb on the city was regarded as just an extension of this campaign, and early news in from there was slow. Also, the Soviet Red Army had invaded Manchuria, sparking fear in Japan of communism and anxiety about social stability. Failure in the ground war also contributed to the country's final decision, following the loss of Okinawa, the fifth-largest island, and the threatened invasion of the southern homeland, with a poor level of defensive preparation. Another factor was to try to preserve Japan's national polity ( kokutai ) from Allied elimination. Such factors may be overlooked when explaining Hirohito's 'sacred decision' to surrender on August 15. Overy looks at the way in which the willingness to kill civilians and destroy cities became normalised as moral concerns were blunted. Scientists, airmen and politiicians followed a strategy of mass destruction they would never have endorsed before the war began. He expands what is often an American narrative, thanks to scholarship that has made the Japanese side of the story a lot better known now than a generation ago. This aspect is integrated as fully as possible in discussing both kinds of bombing and their effects on the leadership and population: 'Understanding the Japanese view of surrender shows why it was so difficult to achieve – indeed it was never called a surrender but 'termination of the war'.' The author notes the cultural differences at play between the Allies and Japanese. At that time, Japanese culture was based on worship of the emperor, who was regarded as the father of his people and a living god. All military personnel, for example, had an obligation to die to defend the emperor. Yet death was not the end; rather, the dead became enshrined 'warrior-gods' ( gunshin ). And when Japan didn't give up right away after the bombing, it was thought by the Allies that the people were fanatics who would rather die than surrender. The truth was that there were already many divisions in the country: the military argued over strategy, and army factions over the economy. Conflict brewed between the elite who sought peace and the military leadership that wanted to fight on. While the emperor was the supreme sovereign, most decisions were made by the cabinet and the military high-ups. From the American perspective, the widely held view has remained that the huge number of deaths of Japanese citizens was worthwhile. The bombing was both necessary and legitimate, precluding a bloody invasion. President Harry S. Truman said that saving a quarter of a million young American lives 'was worth a couple of Japanese cities'. Overy covers diplomatic and cultural factors as well as military decisions, with the latest scholarship to better understand the historical, political and philosophical aspects of events.
